odradek

There have been several nice pages lately in DeB. This one is definitely among them, even if I don’t share the same enthusiasm for the subject. I preferred the first one; I have a somewhat "mixed-up" memory of this one, so I’ll avoid giving it the three stars I would. I then lost track of the Loop Guru; it seems he had started churning out rather useless clones. What happened to him, Lato B? - Well, Kosmo, are you sure the first of the Transglobal was less interesting? I have serious doubts, considering also the period in which it was released... -

It still happens to me (and it's the second time today) to think that I’ve risen from the stone to the hand that threw it... I’ve lost track of them, these here. You mention names that enhance the impression that we've fed on very similar listens. On the next page, will I find another nick next to the title?

Exactly, Ascanio, I avoided entering the thicket that the word art generates upon its appearance. Because I believe that's where the ensuing tangle lies, and therefore the move is to avoid putting it in the middle. Scaruffi, whom I happen to hear from time to time for other reasons, often uses Zappa's phrase, not only on his site. It seems funny to precede the improbable encyclopedic attempt with such a definitive statement, but this very statement "saves" the content, preventing it from being placed in the realm of "criticism." It perhaps shifts it to the realm of art? No, but rather to the much more concrete and defined territory of mapping, of the entomological cataloging of one of the forms of human doing. We are talking, whether one wants to consider it or not, about things. About a music, once and for all, reified, made into a thing. When the attempt to derive something else sets in, the "feeling," the inevitable relationships, its ability to evoke the "unspeakable," art, in short, well, then, I think we begin to talk about something else. We are talking about us. Whether we want it, whether we know it, or not.

From the stone, I believe I can recognize the hand. What do you say, head, am I wrong?

I remember the navigation of Laswell & Namlook, in one of the CDs with that title, perhaps a bit soporific, but my little tube probably contained a different kind of paste back then and the soundtrack didn't seem appropriate. Did this come out on the same label, Subharmonic? Dear Pin, any glimpses in the form of samples?

Certo, invia il testo che desideri tradurre.

Already asked elsewhere these days: but why psicAdelica, and also in bold? Okay about the qualities of the mentioned Underworld album, but some doubt about the genius attributed to others. Some samples would be appropriate, kind That Crazy One. - SAMPLE CAMPAIGN 2006 -

Certo, invia il testo che desideri tradurre.

I know you always round the rating of albums from 4.5 to 5. Sorry if I don’t do that; I’m becoming a little accountant Debasico. With your pages, however, the issue doesn’t arise.

Since the situation is becoming, as usual, intricate, I’m stepping back in for a related observation to my post above... a few evenings ago, I happened to hear Arbasino on TV, and there was a reference to Calvino and his work of "decriminalizing" "lightness," which until him was considered synonymous with frivolity. It's somewhat what I was trying to convey using the term weakness, in contrast to the apparent strength and completeness demonstrated by other works. And it's a hallmark, that of light weak contemplativeness, of the album in question, in my opinion. I won't enter into the dispute over the "interpretation" of the literary figures mentioned. It’s amusing, nonetheless, this little diatribe supported by a "proud non-reader"... Enea, can I say this or do you feel persecuted?